I’ve become increasingly aware of a trend within our society to classify moral stances as intolerant. I guess I should correct that and say that these moral stances are classified as intolerant at best, and as bigotry at the worst. In our rapidly expanding culture of ethical relativism, clearly drawing a line in the sand to say unequivocally that something is wrong draws the ire of those who worship at the altar of political correctness. And why should this be? Surely someone who claims to embrace the idea that all philosophies are roughly equal can wrap their brain around the fact that someone might not share their lack of conviction.
I’m tired of being accused of bigotry by saying that homosexuality is wrong. It’s not just because of my admittedly Judeo-Christian background; there are sound reasons, based on the principles of the development of our species, that lead me to believe that homosexuality a dead-end for humanity as a whole. Our evolutionary imperative is to reproduce and expand to the limit of our resources. Anything that directly counteracts this biological manifest destiny is counter-productive. At least with heterosexual relationships, whether they bear children or not, you aren’t violating millions of years of development that have placed humankind at the pinnacle of the animal kingdom on Earth. These relationships also have the potential to benefit the species as a whole with future offspring. I could also make the argument biblically, traditionally, or morally, but most of the people reading this blog don’t recognize the authority of such arguments. I’ll stick with a strictly Darwinian approach.
Having global warming shoved down my throat by make-believe scientists more interested in grant dollars and prestige than in actual science certainly doesn’t give credibility to the notion that most environmentally aware people are open-minded. Quite the contrary–anyone who disagrees with the junk science is automatically labeled as a big-business mouthpiece. Never mind that there are scientists around the world calling into question the very assumptions that have led to the conclusion that the Earth is in a warming phase. This movement has taken on the flavor of a moral demand on the population of the world without the wealth of hard facts needed to make it universally applicable. Suddenly, when I, as a trained scientist, call into question the data that I see, I am ignorant and foolish. My own analysis of the available data is dismissed because it doesn’t meet with the politically correct stance that dominates public discourse.
These examples lead me to the point of this rant: Why are people who take a stance on a moral or factual basis labeled as bigots? I can condemn an activity without making any statement whatsoever about an individual. In fact, my condemnation of an activity means that I care enough about the people involved to point out behavior that is self-destructive to themselves or to the race as a whole. My stance is not one of hate, but one of polite rebuke and love. My goal is to support people while helping them to break out of whatever situation they find themselves in, just as Christ himself treated those in his care.
Let’s be abundantly clear: Saying that something is wrong does not make someone an automatic bigot. For example, anti-war protesters annoy me to a great degree. Despite this, I don’t call them anti-soldier or anti-war bigots. I understand that their moral code dictates that they protest against the loss of life that comes with any war. I may take satisfaction in the irony that it was an entire series of wars in our nation’s history that give them the peace and the freedom to protest, but at least I give them the benefit of appreciating their position.
I would ask that those who claim to be open-minded truly strive for this, understanding that there are those in the world who would rather fight for what they think is right, rather than passively sitting back and letting relativism unravel the fabric of society. Smugly beating your chest and telling everyone how awesome you are for considering other viewpoints is the quickest way for me to pigeonhole you into the idiot box. Most often, these are the people who are the most obnoxious about their viewpoints and the least open to discussion.